I am truly shocked by the people criticizing this film for lack of substance. I've seen comments about how there is limited dialogue, and therefore no character development, and hardly any story. Did we watch the same film? I'm thinking we must not have.
Shame dives into the life of a man living with an addiction to sex. The first 10 minutes of this movie effectively introduces him, his addiction, his relationship with humanity (sister included), and barely uses any words to do so. You shouldn't need a lot of dialogue when emotions are conveyed with facial expressions, effective cinematography, and great editing. This film is loaded with all of that.
Obviously films are subjective, but I feel those who say they didn't get to "know' the characters at all must always need everything spoon fed to them. I am not a sex addict, but still connected with both Fassbender and Mulligan. I found the development both subtle and extremely realistic. Does everything need to always have that Hollywood ending? Should everything get wrapped up nicely and leave you with a warm and fuzzy feeling when you walk out of the theater? I definitely don't think so.
Anybody who does need that probably shouldn't watch any Steve McQueen films. Anyone who can appreciate a raw, subtle, and beautifully made film should go watch Shame.
